SPANISH – WORLD LANGUAGE
INTRODUCTION TO PORTFOLIO
RUBRIC
Trait
1
Unacceptable
Introduction to Portfolio Does not define the
purpose of the
portfolio.
2
Beginning
Vaguely defines the
purpose of the
portfolio.
3
Developing
Adequately
defines the
purpose of the
portfolio.
4
Capable
Clearly and
accurately
delineates the
purpose of the
portfolio.
5
Accomplished
Defines the purpose of the
TWS portfolio in a
professional and articulate
manner.
There is no
description (or a very
poor one) of the
learning outcomes
selected.
There is a brief
description of
outcomes, but the
number is less than
required.
There is an
acceptable
description of
learning
outcomes.
There is a specific There is an exemplary
description of the description of the
learning
outcomes.
outcomes.
There are no
connections made
between the TWS
elements and the
College of Education
Outcomes.
The connections
made between the
elements of the TWS
and the COE
Outcomes are
minimal
The connections
made between the
elements of the
TWS and the
COE Outcomes
are satisfactory.
The connections
made between the
elements of the
TWS and the
College of
Education
Outcomes are
clear.
The connections made
between the elements of
the TWS and the COE
Outcomes are clear and
focused.
There is no
description of the
TWS portfolio
organization.
The description of
the organization of
the TWS portfolio is
vague and not easily
understood.
The description of
the TWS portfolio
organization is
acceptable.
The description of
the TWS portfolio
organization is
logical and in an
easy to
understand
format.
The description of the
organization is excellent,
well thought out, and
logical.
PHILOSOPHY STATEMENT
RUBRIC
Trait
Philosophy Statement
1
Unacceptable
Offers no evidence
that the candidate
has the P-12 student
as the focus.
2
Beginning
Offers minimal
evidence that the
candidate has the P12 student as the
focus.
3
Developing
Offers adequate
evidence that the
candidate has the
P-12 student as the
focus.
4
Capable
Offers significant
evidence that the
candidate has the
P-12 student as the
focus.
5
Accomplished
Offers superior evidence
that the candidate has the
P-12 student as the focus.
Offers no evidence
that the
SPECTRUM model
is the framework
Offers minimal
evidence that the
SPECTRUM model
is the framework.
Offers adequate
evidence that the
SPECTRUM
model is the
framework.
Offers significant
evidence that the
SPECTRUM
model is the
framework.
Offers superior evidence
that the SPECTRUM
model is the framework.
Offers no evidence
that the candidate
understands theory
and research.
Offers minimal
evidence that the
candidate
understands theory
and research.
Offers adequate
evidence that the
candidate
understands theory
and research.
Offers significant
evidence that the
candidate
understands theory
and research.
Offers superior evidence
that the candidate
understands theory and
research.
Offers no evidence
that the candidate
has gained insight
into teaching and
learning through
field experiences
and coursework.
Offers minimal
evidence that the
candidate has gained
insight into teaching
and learning through
field experiences and
coursework.
Offers adequate
evidence that the
candidate has
gained insight into
teaching and
learning through
field experiences
and coursework.
Offers significant
evidence that the
candidate has
gained insight into
teaching and
learning through
field experiences
and coursework.
Offers superior evidence
that the candidate has
gained insight into
teaching and learning
through field experiences
and coursework.
Contextual Factors Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher uses information about the learning/teaching context and student individual differences to set learning
goals, plan instruction and assess learning.
Rating →
1
2
3
4
5
Score
Indicator ↓
Unacceptable
Beginning
Developing
Capable
Accomplished
Displays no
Displays minimal,
Displays some
Displays a
Displays and explains
knowledge of the
irrelevant, or biased
knowledge of the
comprehensive
an in-depth
characteristics of the
knowledge of the
characteristics of
understanding of the understanding of the
community, school,
characteristics of the
the community,
characteristics of the characteristics of the
Knowledge of
and classroom to
community, school, and
school, and
community, school, community, school,
Community,
create a supportive
classroom to create a
classroom to create and classroom to
and classroom to
School and
learning environment. supportive learning
a supportive
create a supportive
create a supportive
Classroom
environment.
learning
learning
learning environment
Factors
environment that
environment that
that may affect
may affect learning. may affect learning. learning with specific
data, cited sources,
and/or statistics.
Displays no
Displays minimal,
Displays general
Displays general and Displays and explains
knowledge of student
stereotypical, or
knowledge of
specific knowledge
in-depth knowledge of
differences (e.g.,
irrelevant knowledge of
student differences of student
student differences
(e.g., development,
Knowledge of development, interests, student differences (e.g., (e.g., development, differences (e.g.,
development, interests,
interests, culture,
development,
interests, culture,
Characteristics culture,
abilities/disabilities,
culture,
abilities/disabilities, interests, culture,
abilities/disabilities,
of Students
diverse language
abilities/disabilities,
diverse language
abilities/disabilities, diverse language
learners).
diverse language
learners).
diverse language
learners).
learners).
learners).
Fails to demonstrate
Demonstrates general
Demonstrates
Articulates an
Articulates general
understanding of a
understanding of a
general
understanding of
and specific
variety of approaches to
understanding of a varied learning
understanding of
Knowledge of variety of approaches
to
learning
among
learning
among
students
variety
of
modalities
and
varied learning
Students’
students, e.g., multiple and may know one or
approaches to
multiple
modalities and
Varied
two learning modalities
learning among
intelligences.
multiple intelligences.
Approaches to intelligences and/or
learning modalities.
but not a variety.
students and can
Learning
distinguish between
multiple modalities.
Displays no
knowledge of students’
skills, language
acquisition at various
Knowledge of
developmental levels,
Students’
and previous learning
Skills and
and does not indicate
Prior Learning
either is important.
Identifies the value of
understanding students’
skills, language
acquisition at various
developmental levels,
and previous learning but
demonstrates its
importance for the whole
class only.
Does not provide
implications for
instruction and
assessment based on
student individual
differences and
community, school,
and classroom
characteristics or
provides inappropriate
implications.
Provides minimal
implications for
instruction and
assessment based on
student individual
differences and
community, school, and
classroom characteristics
or provides inappropriate
implications.
Implications
for
Instructional
Planning and
Assessment
Identifies the value
of understanding
students’ skills,
language
acquisition at
various
developmental
levels, and previous
learning for the
group and
individuals.
Provides general
implications for
instruction and
assessment based
on student
individual
differences and
community, school,
or classroom
characteristics.
Displays knowledge
of understanding
students’ skills,
language acquisition
at various
developmental
levels, and previous
learning, including
special needs
students.
Articulates an indepth understanding
of students’ skills,
language acquisition
at various
developmental levels,
and previous learning
for the group and
individuals including
special needs students.
Provides specific
implications for
instruction and
assessment based on
student individual
differences and
community, school,
and classroom
characteristics.
Provides specific
implications and
analyzes decisions for
instruction and
assessment based on
student individual
differences (ELL and
inclusion students)
and community,
school, and classroom
characteristics.
Learning Goals
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher sets significant, challenging, varied and appropriate learning goals.
Rating →
Indicator ↓
1
Unacceptable
Goals are not in
evidence.
2
Beginning
Goals reflect only
one type or level of
learning
3
Developing
Goals reflect several
types or levels of
learning but lack
significance or
challenge
Goals are vague or
not in evidence.
Goals are not stated
clearly and are
activities rather than
learning outcomes.
Goals are not
developmentally
appropriate; nor
address pre-requisite
knowledge, skills,
experiences, or other
student needs.
Some of the goals
are clearly stated as
learning outcomes.
Goals are not
aligned with
national, NJ
standards or COE
standards for foreign
languages.
Some goals are
aligned with
national, state or
COE standards for
foreign languages.
Significance,
Challenge and
Variety
Clarity
Appropriateness
for Students
Alignment with
National, State or
Local Standards
Goals presented are
inappropriate for the
class or set
unrealistic
expectations for
students.
Fails to develop
goals aligned with
national, state and
COE standards for
foreign languages.
Some goals are
developmentally
appropriate and
address some prerequisite knowledge,
skills, experiences,
and other student
needs.
4
Capable
Goals reflect several
types or levels of
learning and are
significant and
challenging.
5
Accomplished
Goals are significant
and challenge
thought and
expectations
including three or
more levels and
types.
Most of the goals are Goals are clearly
clearly stated as
stated in behavioral
learning outcomes
terms.
Most goals are
developmentally
appropriate;
addresses prerequisite knowledge,
skills, experiences
and other student
needs are
considered.
Most of the goals are
explicitly aligned
with national, state
and COE standards
for foreign
languages.
Goals demonstrate
realistic expectations
for all students in
addition to providing
for students’ critical
thinking and
reflection.
Goals are aligned
with national, state,
COE standards for
foreign languages
and are articulated,
adapted, and
integrated through
the lesson
presentations.
Alignments are
Score
explained.
Assessment Plan
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher sets significant, challenging, varied and appropriate learning goals.
Rating →
Indicator ↓
Alignment
with Learning
Goals and
Instruction
Clarity of
Criteria and
Standards for
Performance
Multiple
Modes and
Approaches
1
Unacceptable
Minimal plans for
pre and post
assessments are
provided;
assessments do
not measure
foreign language
(?) learning
goals.
The assessments
contain no criteria
for measuring
student
performance
relative to the
learning goals.
The assessment
plan fails to
demonstrate
evidence of
student
assessment other
than after
instructions.
Limited
knowledge of
formal/informal
assessments
2
Beginning
Content and methods
of assessment lack
congruence with
foreign language (?)
learning goals or lack
cognitive complexity.
Assessments contain
poorly stated criteria
for measuring student
performance leading
to student confusion.
The assessment plan
includes only one
assessment mode and
does not assess
students before,
during, and after
instruction.
3
Developing
Some of the learning goals
are assess through the
assessment plan, but many
are not congruent with
foreign language (?)
learning goals in content
and cognitive complexity.
4
Capable
Each of the learning
goals is assessed
through the assessment
plan; assessments are
congruent with the
foreign language (?)
learning goals in content
and cognitive
complexity.
Assessment criteria have
Assessment criteria are
been developed, but they are clear and are explicitly
not clear or are not
linked to the learning
explicitly linked to the
goals.
learning goals.
5
Accomplished
All learning goals
are assessed by the
assessment plan,
and provide
students with
constructive
feedback on their
foreign language
(?) learning.
Assessment criteria
are linked to
learning goals;
accurately
documenting
student learning.
The assessment plan
includes multiple modes but
all are either pencil/paper
based (i.e., they are not
performance assessments)
and/or do not require the
integration of knowledge,
skills and critical thinking.
The assessment
plan uses
formal/informal
assessments and
student’s selfassessments to
assess student
performance and
effectiveness of the
instructional
sequence. It helps
to implement
purposeful
measures.
The assessment plan
includes multiple
assessment modes
(including performance
assessments, lab reports,
research projects, etc.)
and assesses student
performance throughout
the instructional
sequence.
Score
Technical
Soundness
Adaptations
Based on the
Individual
Needs of
Students
Assessments are
not designed to
measure lessons
goals and
objectives;
scoring
procedures are
inaccurate.
Assessments are not
valid; scoring
procedures are
inaccurate; items or
prompts are poorly
written; directions
and procedures are
confusing to students.
Assessments appear to have
some validity. Some
scoring procedures are
explained; some items or
prompts are clearly written;
some directions and
procedures are clear to
students
Teacher does not
address or link
assessments to
identified
contextual
factors.
Teacher does not
adapt assessments to
meet the individual
needs of students or
these assessments are
inappropriate.
Teacher makes adaptations
to assessments that are
appropriate to meet the
individual needs of some
students.
Assessments appear to
be valid; scoring
procedures are
explained; most items or
prompts are clearly
written; directions and
procedures are clear to
students.
Assessments appear
to be valid and
clearly written.
Assessments data
used to document
students’ strengths
as well as
opportunities for
learning to
determine the
direction of
instruction.
Teacher makes
Teacher’s
adaptations to
adaptations of
assessments that are
assessments for all
appropriate to meet the
students needs to be
individual needs of most met. Adaptations
students.
are creative and
show evidence of
outstanding
problem-solving
skills by teacher
candidate.
Design for Instruction
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher designs instruction for specific learning goals, student characteristics and needs, and learning contexts.
Rating →
1
2
3
4
5
Score
Indicator ↓
Unacceptable
Beginning
Developing
Capable
Accomplished
No lesson is
Few lessons are
Most lessons are
All lessons are
All lessons are
linked to
explicitly linked to
explicitly linked to
explicitly linked to
explicitly linked to
learning goal.
learning goals. Few
learning goals. Most
learning goals. All
learning goals,
No learning
learning activities,
learning activities,
learning activities,
demonstrating
Alignment
assignments and
assignments and
assignments and
critical thinking and
with Learning activities are
aligned to
resources are aligned
resources are aligned
resources are aligned
reflection in
Goals
learning goals.
with learning goals. Not with learning goals.
with learning goals.
activities and
all learning goals are
Most learning goals are All learning goals are
assignments.
covered in the design.
covered in the design.
covered in the design.
Teacher does
Teacher’s use of content Teacher’s use of
Teacher’s use of
Teacher provides
not demonstrate appears to contain
content appears to be
content appears to be
cross-content
purpose and
numerous inaccuracies.
mostly accurate.
accurate. Focus of the approach to student
Accurate
relevancy of
Content seems to be
Shows some awareness content is congruent
learning, stressing
Representation
content.
viewed more as isolated
of the big ideas or
with the big ideas or
depth and breadth of
of Content
skills and facts rather
structure of the
structure of the
content.
than as part of a larger
discipline.
discipline.
conceptual structure.
The lessons
The lessons within the
The lessons within the Most lessons within the All lessons within
within the unit
unit are not logically
unit have some logical unit are logically
the unit demonstrate
do not
organized
organization and
organized and appear
how knowledge of
demonstrate
(e.g., sequenced).
appear to be somewhat to be useful in moving content is created
Lesson and
useful in moving
students toward
and organized and
Unit Structure knowledge of
how content is
students toward
achieving the learning
integrates knowledge
created and
achieving the learning
goals.
from other fields of
developed.
goals.
content.
A single,
Little variety of
Some variety in
Significant variety
Instructional
Use of a
instructional
instruction, activities,
instruction, activities,
across instruction,
strategic assignments
Variety of
modality is used assignments, and
assignments, or
activities, assignments, are varied to
Instruction,
with textbook
resources. Heavy
resources but with
and/or resources. This accommodate
Activities,
reliance on textbook or
limited contribution to variety makes a clear
individual learners
Assignments as only
single resource (e.g.,
learning.
contribution to
and to achieve lesson
and Resources reference.
Use of
Contextual
Information
and Data to
Select
Appropriate
and Relevant
Activities,
Assignments
and Resources
Use of
Technology
Instruction has
not been based
upon
knowledge of
subject matter,
students or preassessment
data.
Teacher does
not use
technology
during
instruction.
work sheets).
Instruction has been
designed with very
limited reference to
contextual factors and
pre-assessment data.
Activities and
assignments do not
appear productive and
appropriate for each
student.
Technology is
inappropriately used and
inappropriate rationale is
provided.
learning.
Some instruction has
Most instruction has
been designed with
been designed with
reference to contextual reference to contextual
factors and prefactors and preassessment data. Some assessment data. Most
activities and
activities and
assignments appear
assignments appear
productive and
productive and
appropriate for each
appropriate for each
student.
student.
Teacher uses
Teacher integrates
technology but it does
appropriate technology
not make a significant
that makes a significant
contribution to
contribution to
teaching and learning
teaching and learning
or teacher provides
or provides a strong
limited rationale for not rationale for not using
using technology.
technology.
goals.
All instruction
addresses the diverse
needs of individual
students and
contextual factors of
community, school
and class.
Teacher integrates a
variety of media and
technology into
instruction and
relates both directly
to lesson goals.
Instructional Decision-Making
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher uses on-going analysis of student learning to make instructional decisions.
Rating →
Indicator ↓
Sound
Professional
Practice
Modifications
Based on
Analysis of
Student
Learning
Congruence
Between
Modifications
and Learning
Goals
1
Unacceptable
Instructional
decisions are
inappropriate
for age of
student, content,
and community.
2
Beginning
Many instructional
decisions are
inappropriate and not
pedagogically sound.
3
Developing
Instructional decisions
are mostly appropriate,
but some decisions are
not pedagogically
sound.
4
Capable
Most instructional
decisions are
pedagogically sound
(i.e., they are likely to
lead to student learning).
Teacher treats
class as “one
plan fits all”
with no
modifications.
Fails to
demonstrate
evidence of
instructional
modifications.
Limited modifications of
the instructional plan
have been made, to
accommodate individual
learners.
Some modifications of
the instructional plan are
made to address
individual student needs,
but these are not based
on the analysis of
student learning, best
practice, or contextual
factors.
Inappropriate
modification in
instruction.
Modifications in
instruction lack
congruence with learning
goals.
Modifications in
instruction are
somewhat congruent
with learning goals.
Appropriate
modifications of the
instructional plan are
made to address
individual student
needs. These
modifications are
informed by the analysis
of student
learning/performance,
best practice, or
contextual factors.
Modifications in
instruction are
congruent with learning
goals.
5
Accomplished
Most
instructional
decisions are
pedagogically
sound and build
on concepts and
skills previously
learned.
Appropriate
modifications of
the plan are
made to
individualize
instruction.
Rational to
improve student
progress is
provided.
Modifications in
instruction are
congruent with
learning goals
and cites current
research as the
rationale for the
modifications.
Score
Analysis of Student Learning
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher uses assessment data to profile student learning and communicate information about student progress and
achievement.
Rating →
Indicator ↓
Clarity and
accuracy of
Presentation
Alignment
with Learning
Goals
1
Unacceptable
Presentation does not
include data.
2
Beginning
Presentation is not
clear and accurate; it
does not accurately
reflect the data.
3
Developing
Presentation is
understandable and
contains few errors.
4
Capable
Presentation is easy
to understand and
contains no errors of
presentation.
Neither analysis of
student learning nor
visual representation is
aligned with learning
goals.
Analysis of student
learning is aligned
with learning goals.
Visual
representations do
not include whole
class, sub-groups or
individual students.
Analysis is fully
aligned with learning
goals and provides a
comprehensive
profile of student
learning for the
whole class,
subgroups, and two
individuals.
Interpretation is
unsupported by data
Interpretation is
inaccurate, and
conclusions are
missing.
Analysis of student
learning is general
with learning goals
and/or fails to
provide a
comprehensive
profile of student
learning relative to
the goals for the
whole class,
subgroups, and two
individuals.
Interpretation is
technically accurate,
but conclusions are
missing or not fully
supported by data.
Analysis is weak and
Analysis of student
Analysis of student
Analysis of student
Interpretation
of Data
Evidence of
Interpretation is
meaningful, and
appropriate
conclusions are
drawn from the data.
5
Score
Accomplished
Contains no errors of
presentation.
Presentation is
communicated with
the use of technology
and media.
Analysis is thorough
and complete,
recognizing student
progress in developing
content proficiency.
Visual and narrative
summaries
demonstrate the extent
of student progress.
Interpretation is
comprehensive.
Appropriate
conclusions are drawn
from the data.
Candidate has detailed
the assessment and
evaluation of student
gains.
A thorough analysis of
Impact on
Student
Learning
fails to provide
subgroup achievement
learning fails to
include evidence of
impact on student
learning in terms of
numbers of students
who achieved and
made progress
toward learning
goals. No
remediation is
provided.
learning includes
incomplete evidence
of the impact on
student learning in
terms of numbers of
students who
achieved and made
progress toward
learning goals.
Limited remediation
is provided.
learning includes
evidence of the
impact on student
learning in terms of
number of students
who achieved and
made progress
toward each learning
goal. Remediation is
specific.
the learning gains of
all students and
subgroups is
presented.
Remediation is
specific.
Reflection and Self-Evaluation
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher analyzes the relationship between his or her instruction and student learning in order to improve teaching
practice.
Rating →
1
2
3
4
5
Score
Indicator ↓
Unacceptable
Beginning
Developing
Capable
Accomplished
No evidence or
Provides one possible Provides evidence but
Uses evidence to
Uses evidence to
reasons provided to reason as evidence to simplistic, superficial
support conclusions
support more than four
support conclusions support conclusions
reasons are given or
drawn in “Analysis of conclusions drawn in
drawn in “Analysis drawn in Analysis of hypotheses to support
Student Learning”
“Analysis of Student
Interpretation
of Student
Student Learning.
conclusions drawn in
section.
Learning” section.
of Student
Learning” section.
“Analysis of Student
Explores multiple
Learning
Learning” section.
hypotheses for why
some students did and
others did not meet
learning goals.
Provides no
Rationale for
Identifies successful
Identifies successful
Reflects on own
rationale for why
activities or
and unsuccessful
and unsuccessful
performance as a
some activities or
assessments
activities or
activities and
teacher focusing on the
Insights on
assessments were
presented in
assessments and
assessments and
impact of the
Effective
more successful
confusing manner;
superficially explores
provides plausible
experience on student
Instruction
than others.
insights limited to
reasons for their
reasons (based on
learning. Current
and
knowledge-based
success or lack thereof theory or research)
research findings are
Assessment
instruction and use of (no use of theory or
for their success or
incorporated as
formal assessments.
research).
lack thereof.
supportive
documentation.
Does not connect
Connections among
Connects foreign
Logically connects
Connects foreign
foreign language
foreign language
language learning
foreign language
language learning
learning goals,
learning goals,
goals, instructions, and learning goals,
goals, instruction and
Alignment
instruction,
and
instructions
and
assessment
results
in
instruction,
and
assessment results in
Among Goals,
assessment results
assessments are
the discussion of
assessment results in the discussion of
Instruction
in the discussion of irrelevant or
student learning and
the discussion of
student learning and
and
student learning
inaccurate.
effective instruction,
student learning and
effective instruction.
Assessment
and effective
but misunderstandings effective instruction. Current research
instruction and/or
or conceptual gaps are
findings are
the connections are
irrelevant or
inaccurate.
Implications
for Future
Teaching
Implications
for
Professional
Development
Provides no ideas
or inappropriate
ideas for
redesigning foreign
language learning
goals, instruction,
and assessment.
present.
Provides limited
ideas for redesigning
foreign language
learning goals,
instruction, and
assessment.
Rationale is
inadequate; or absent.
Provides ideas for
redesigning foreign
language learning
goals, instruction, and
assessment but offers
no rationale for why
these changes would
improve student
learning.
Provides no
Provides foreign
Presents professional
professional foreign language goals that
foreign language
language learning
are not related to the
learning goals that are
goals.
insights and
not strongly related to
experiences described the insights and
in this section.
experiences described
in this section and/or
provides a vague plan
for meeting the goals.
incorporated as
supportive
documentation.
Provides ideas for
redesigning foreign
language learning
goals, instruction, and
assessment and
explains why these
modifications would
improve student
learning.
Presents professional
foreign language
learning goals that
emerge from the
insights and
experiences descried
in this section.
Provides a repertoire
of strategies, offering
specific alternative
actions complete with
probable successes for
student learning.
Presents four or more
professional l foreign
language earning goals
that clearly emerge
from the insights and
experiences described
in this section.
Describes at least two
specific steps to meet
these goals
Writing Mechanics and Organization
Rubric
Standard: TWS Portfolio is organized clearly, grammatically correct and written in standard English.
1
Unacceptable
2
Beginning
3
Developing
4
Capable
5
Accomplished
Writing Mechanics
The use of standard
written English is
unsatisfactory at this
level. More than 10
errors in punctuation,
capitalization,
subject-verb
agreement may exist
or excessive
fragments or run-ons
may detract from the
overall content of the
writing.
The use of standard
written English
needs attention.
More than 9 errors
in punctuation,
capitalization,
subject-verb
agreement may exist
or 2 or more
fragments or run-ons
may exist.
The use of standard
written English is
adequate with no
more than 8 errors in
punctuation,
capitalization,
subject-verb
agreement may exist
or 1 or more
fragments or run-ons
may exist.
The use of
standard written
English is good
with no more than
5 errors.
The use of standard
written English is
outstanding with no
more than 2 errors in
punctuation,
capitalization, subjectverb agreement may
exist. No fragments or
run-ons may exist
Syntax
Syntax and word
choice may be
unsatisfactory, or the
writing may lack
cohesion.
Syntax and word
choice may need
attention, or the
writing may lack
cohesion.
Syntax and word
choice are
satisfactory, and the
writing is cohesive.
Syntax and word
choice are
appropriate, and
the writing is
cohesive.
Syntax and word
choice are clearly
superior, and the
writing is very
cohesive.
Trait